This article is within the scope of WikiProject Middle Ages, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Middle Ages on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Turkey, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Turkey and related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
I put the "tactical success" back in and made it a quote and footnoted it. I changed Muslim victory to Muslim strategic victory. I think we all agree on that! Smail seems convinced that it was a local Crusader tactical victory, so I'm going with his judgment. Pyrrhic victories happen (e.g., Battle of Guilford Court House) and I believe this battle fits the description. Djmaschek (talk) 02:37, 15 May 2008 (UTC)
I changed the sentence "The Crusaders were driven out by the Muslim army and..." to "The Crusaders defeated the Muslim army in the field but..." I have cited 3 sources that call it tactical Crusader victory. Why not add a notation that John France calls it a Crusader defeat, perhaps in a footnote? I would do it myself, but I don't have a copy of Mr. France's work handy and don't know exactly what he has to say. Djmaschek (talk) 01:55, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
Can someone show me where in this book, Western Warfare in the Age of the Crusades, 1000-1300 By John France, pg. 220, does it say Muslim victory for the battle of Marj es-Suffar? Thanks. --Kansas Bear (talk) 20:26, 30 April 2011 (UTC)